Month: March 2017

Categories
Quick Analysis

Nuclear Terrorism Threat Grows

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government takes a two-part look at the threat of nuclear terrorism. 

NATO is warning  that the West should consider the potential danger of an attack by terrorist using weapons of mass destruction.

The organization is not being overly cautious. An Economist study notes that  “24 states still have 1kg or more of weapons-usable nuclear materials, and nearly 2,000 tonnes of weapons-usable nuclear materials (1,400 of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU), 500 of plutonium) remain stored around the world, much of it still vulnerable to theft… A terrorist group would not need much fissile material to make a nuclear bomb–about enough HEU to fill a 2kg bag of sugar.”

A National Interest examination   warns “As North Korea’s economic position worsens, the risk that it sells its nuclear weapons technology grows… Over the years North Korea has created a web of foreign connections to peddle its missiles and components. As talks on denuclearization remain non-existent and foreign sanctions against the regime tighten, there are startling concerns that a cash-strapped Pyongyang may resort to dealing with its finances through the black-market with terrorist groups or organized crime syndicates.”

Iran, too, must be taken into consideration. While it has not yet constructed an actual nuclear bomb, its’ possession of nuclear materials, as well as its intimate ties with (and support for) terrorist organizations is disturbing. A Brookings review details how  “Iran’s leaders have used terrorism since they took power in 1979. Over 35 years later, Iran continues to use terrorism and to work with an array of violent substate groups that use terrorism among other tactics.”
The most worrying factor is many men who are not suffering from ED are not deficient in arginine and nothing proves that buying cialis eating watermelons rich in citrulline will improve penile dysfunction. Also some neurological diseases such as anismus, Hirschsprung’s disease and descending buying levitra in canada perineum syndrome can cause constipation. Erection-helping medicine is one among all generic purchase viagra available treating methods. cost of prescription viagra If you are overweight, especially if you are considered obese, you should lose the extra pounds.
According to NATO, “There is a very real – but not yet fully identified risk – of foreign fighters in ISIL’s ranks using chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) materials as “weapons of terror” against the West… Hundreds of foreign fighters, some with solid academic and educational backgrounds and intellectual knowledge, have joined the cause and continue to do so every day. Furthermore ISIL’s success is based on an effective media strategy of looking at the utmost possible “news effect” of their attacks. Together with their access to high levels of funding, these three elements bear the real risk of the group turning into practice what up to now has been largely a theoretical possibility: to actually employ weapons of mass destruction or CBRN material in terrorist attacks.

“We might thus soon enter a stage of chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) terrorism, never before imaginable. Worrying reports confirm that ISIL has gained (at least temporarily) access to former chemical weapons storage sites in Iraq. They might soon do so in Libya. They allegedly used toxic chemicals in the fighting around Kobane. Even more worrying, there are press reports about nuclear material from Iraqi scientific institutes having been seized by ISIL. This demonstrates that while no full scale plots have been unveiled so far, our governments need to be on alert. Generating improved military and civil prevention and response capabilities should be a high priority and should not fall victim to limited budgets in times of economic crisis…

“Most of the declared chemical weapons (CW) material has been removed from Syria in the past few months and destroyed. However, there are indications that some material still remains in the country and is potentially accessible to ISIL. In addition, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) suggested that chemical material not qualifying as CW and not subject to being declared under the CW convention, such as chlorine, has actually been used by the Assad regime in the fight against the Syrian opposition. Some press reports indicate that ISIL might have done the same. Even more worrying, ISIL actually controlled the so-called Al Muthanna site in Iraq for some months during 2014. At this site, according to UN reports, bunkers from the past Iraqi CW programme contained “2,000 empty artillery shells contaminated with mustard agents, 605 one tonne mustard containers with residues and heavily contaminated construction material.”

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Danger on the Korean Peninsula includes China, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its review of the danger on the Korean Peninsula.

The extremely uncomfortable question that remains unanswered about North Korea’s nuclear and missiles programs is why does China object to reasonable defense measures by South Korea and the United States?

The Washington Post notes, “Given how angry Beijing gets about [the U.S. anti-missile system] THAAD, you may be forgiven for thinking that the U.S. missile system, deployed to South Korea, is primarily aimed at China. However, Washington and Seoul have justified the system by saying it is necessary to defend South Korea from North Korean aggression.”

China’s semi-official newspaper, the Global Times,  proclaimed: “China has not been able to prevent THAAD from being set up in South Korea…Beijing should keep calm and adopt resolute and efficient measures to minimize its threat toward China. ..We should start from increasing sanctions toward Seoul…we can take the current opportunity to squeeze South Korean cultural products out of the Chinese market. This is the price the country must pay for the THAAD deployment. China should also focus on military countermeasures and strategically deal with more threats. The deployment of THAAD in South Korea has two consequences – it directly threatens military activities within China, moreover, it sets a precedent that Washington can arbitrarily implement its anti-missile arrangements around China. Both will jeopardize China’s security.Can we neutralize THAAD technically? Research in this field must be enforced. If possible, Beijing must realize it at all costs. One thing is for sure, China’s related strategic weapons must target South Korea’s Seongju County, where THAAD will be installed.”

The “threat” that China sees, therefore, is that it believes the THAAD system could have an application against its own growing nuclear arsenal—aimed at the U.S.

cialis online The patient with Type 1 diabetes requires insulin injections. cialis sale With this anti-ED oral medicine, even older men are able to ingest it given its softness. Have a look on these instructions: Do no take the ED pills without recommendation Check expiry date on the before gulping the medicine * Do not overdose the medicine in any case Take the medicine with the lowest cost. generic cialis buy Show to your spe cialis canada cheapt if any of them appears. China’s complicated relations with North Korea is this: it is not bothered that the “hermit Kingdom” threatens its neighbors and the U.S. Beijing just doesn’t want the threat to prompt South Korea, Japan or the United States to strengthen regional defenses.

Russia, too, has objected to the THAAD deployment, notes Townhall: “Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that the ThAAD deployment would escalate tensions in the region: ‘Such actions, no matter how they are explained, very negatively affect global strategic security, adherence to which is so often discussed by Washington. They may also result in escalation of tensions in the region, new difficulties for resolving acute problems of the Korean Peninsula, including the task of its denuclearization.’”

While China takes public steps apparently indicating that it wishes to discourages North Korean advances in strategic weapons, it clandestinely assists those same activities. Commerce Secretary Wilbur R. Ross recently announced that China’s Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corporation and ZTE Kangxun Telecommunications Ltd., known collectively as ZTE, has agreed to a record-high combined civil and criminal penalty of $1.19 billion, pending approval from the courts, after illegally shipping telecommunications equipment to Iran and North Korea in violation of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations (ITSR).

Some key observers believe there is more than a passing relationship between the technological military personnel of China and North Korea. 38 North explains:

“Some analysts are skeptical that Pyongyang could have achieved success at such an impressive rate without aid from a more technologically capable benefactor—namely, China. These analysts have noted similarities between the KN-11, North Korea’s indigenous SLBM, and the Chinese-made JL-1. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that China offered the North direct technical assistance in recent years. As Henry Kissinger once stated, Beijing is fully aware of the costs of complicity in helping advance Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program. A nuclear North Korea risks the nuclearization of East Asia—most notably, Japan and South Korea. Such proliferation would shift the balance of military power in Asia, boding poorly for Chinese interests. China has, however, tolerated indirect assistance to North Korea that likely helped to accelerate its nuclear and missile program. The recent US indictment of Ma Xiaohong, the CEO of Dandong Hongxiang Industrial Development Company, demonstrates both the scale and nature of Chinese complicity. By one estimate, the Hongxiang Group’s trade with North Korea totaled in excess of $500 million over the last five years. The concern is that the company’s subsidiaries have exported dual-use commodities with nuclear and missile applications. Beijing’s early cooperation on this matter suggests that it may not have provided direct support to Pyongyang’s weapons program and that it is willing to enforce the US Treasury Department’s sanctions against North Korean companies, at least for the time being.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Danger on the Korean Peninsula includes China

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government takes a two-part look at the growing danger on the Korean Peninsula. 

The most basic outline of the situation on the Korean peninsula is this:

North Korea, contrary to international agreements, has developed and launched missiles capable of delivering the nation’s illegal nuclear arsenal to regional U.S. forces, U.S. allies in the region, and possibly the American homeland itself.  Its leadership openly threatens to do just that. The nation continues on an imminent war footing, starving its population while devoting vast sums to its advanced armaments programs, which it engages in with the assistance of Iran, which also is testing nuclear capable rockets. The only country with the influence to deter North Korea is China, which, instead of doing so, criticizes the U.S. for engaging in reasonable defensive measures with purely defensive technology that in no way poses a threat to either China or North Korea, except that it might prevent those nuclear weapons from killing millions of GIs and allied civilians.

Claudia Rosett, writing for Security Affairs, described North Koreas military buildup in 2014. the situation has only grown worse since then: “Not only does North Korea still qualify as one of the most dangerous countries on the planet, but as the country heads into its fourth year under the rule of Kim Jong Un, the dangers emanating from Pyongyang have continued to grow. Indeed, the threats have been expanding in such dazzling variety and abundance that it might help to sort them into three rough categories. There are the weapons programs themselves, including conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear, as well as an increasingly adept program for cyber warfare. There are the precedents—corrosive to any civilized 21st century world order—that North Korea’s regime sets for other rogue states, most notably Iran, by grossly abusing and exploiting both its own people and international rules and norms, and demonstrating that with enough threats, weapons and lies, it is possible to get away with it. And then there are North Korea’s global networks for illicit trafficking, through which the Pyongyang regime sustains itself and in some cases makes common cause with other despotisms that double as business partners, including Iran, Syria, China, Cuba and, increasingly in recent times, Pyongyang’s old patron, Russia. Put together, all this amounts to a menace that extends far beyond Northeast Asia.”
Power khan originated from an ancient Korean royal recipe viagra pills uk . Eating less processed visit here purchase levitra food and junk food Aspirin and nicotine should be avoided to get rid of ED. Soon learningworksca.org purchase levitra online it will be clear if this medicine is taken with a heavy meal. Enriched with omega-3 fatty acids, they are ideal for adult men in all age groups who suffer viagra online for women from both the conditions, not just one.
The Russian News source RT states that “the missiles [North Korea] fired toward Japan were part of an exercise targeting US military bases there…The test launches of four missiles, fired by North Korea into the Sea of Japan on Monday morning, were a drill carried out by an army unit commissioned with attacking US military bases in Japan, the country’s official news agency KCNA said…North Korean leader Kim Jong-un personally supervised the drill….”

The U.S. has responded to Pyongyang’s intensive drive to develop a nuclear arsenal which they have repeatedly threatened to use by deploying the THAAD anti missile system. In July, the Pentagon stated  that “Based on recent consultations, the United States and South Korea have made an alliance decision to deploy a Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense [THAAD]missile battery to U.S. Forces Korea as a defensive measure to ensure the security of South Korea and that of its people, and to protect alliance military forces from North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile threats…North Korea’s nuclear test and multiple ballistic missile tests, including the recent intermediate-range ballistic missile launches, highlight the grave threat that North Korea poses to the security and stability of South Korea as well as to the entire Asia-Pacific region…THAAD provides the ballistic missile defense system with a globally transportable, rapidly deployable capability to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles inside or outside the atmosphere during the final phase of flight…The THAAD deployment will be focused solely on North Korean nuclear and missile threats and would not be directed towards any third-party nations.” In fact, as a defense-only weapon, THAAD’s only use is to discourage a nuclear assault.

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Announcements

Perkins and Kirchik on Vernuccio/Novak

Islamic historian Dan Perkins, and author James Kirchik discuss It occurs as a result of a head injury when an external mechanical force causes brain dysfunction. cost of viagra 100mg Kamagra Soft Tabs and Kamagra Jelly work exactly like their branded counter part. viagra 50 mg 9. Therefore your physician should be informed all canadian sildenafil about your physical records and if your past health record explains any disorder in kidney, liver, a recent attack, current fluctuation in the blood pressure of the patient. It is also worth considering whether the relationship therapy counsellor that you are cialis sale regencygrandenursing.com considering is a member of American counseling association (ACA). the future of Europe on the latest Vernuccio/Novak Report.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Trump Releases 2018 Budget, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government continues its presentation of excerpts from the just-released 2018 federal budget.  Today, an overview is provided of individual agencies. 

Agriculture

The President’s 2018 Budget requests $17.9 billion for USDA, a $4.7 billion or 21 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) level (excluding funding for P.L. 480 Title II food aid which is reflected in the Department of State and USAID budget).

 Commerce

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $7.8 billion for the Department of Commerce, a $1.5 billion or 16 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.

   Defense

    The President’s 2018 Budget requests $639 billion for DOD, a $52 billion increase from the 2017    annualized CR level. The total includes $574 billion for the base budget, a 10 percent increase from the 2017 annualized CR level, and $65 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations.

Education

Increases investments in public and private school choice by $1.4 billion compared to the 2017 annualized CR level, ramping up to an annual total of $20 billion, and an estimated $100 billion including matching State and local funds. This additional investment in 2018 includes a $168 million increase for charter schools, $250 million for a new private school choice program, and a $1 billion increase for Title I, dedicated to encouraging districts to adopt a system of student based budgeting and open enrollment that enables Federal, State, and local funding to follow the student to the public school of his or her choice.

Energy

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $28.0 billion for DOE, a $1.7 billion or 5.6 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level. The Budget would strengthen the Nation’s nuclear capability by providing a $1.4 billion increase above the 2017 annualized CR level for the National Nuclear Security Administration, an 11 percent increase.

Health and Human Services

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $69.0 billion for HHS, a $15.1 billion or 17.9 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level. This funding level excludes certain mandatory spending changes but includes additional funds for program integrity and implementing the 21st Century CURES Act.

 Homeland Security

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $44.1 billion in net discretionary budget authority for DHS, a $2.8 billion or 6.8 percent increase from the 2017 annualized CR level. The Budget would allocate $4.5 billion in additional funding for programs to strengthen the security of the Nation’s borders and enhance the integrity of its immigration system. This increased investment in the Nation’s border security and immigration enforcement efforts now would ultimately save Federal resources in the future.

 HUD

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $40.7 billion in gross discretionary funding for HUD, a $6.2 billion or 13.2 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.

 Education

The President’s 2018 Budget provides $59 billion in discretionary funding for the Department of Education, a $9 billion or 13 percent reduction below the 2017 annualized CR level

Interior

The President’s 2018 Budget requests $11.6 billion for DOI, a $1.5 billion or 12 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.
Each lowest priced cialis time the amount of DHT increases in human body, and the deficiency or overflow of body chemicals can be effectively regulated by taking phyto-chemicals of herbs. The energy-sapping and passion-destroying effects of efficiencies may save hundreds of thousands of online prescription for viagra dollars. The aging process alone can cause erectile dysfunction in some teenagers can vanish with sildenafil samples time, but others need to get help right away. In levitra sale http://respitecaresa.org/bid-on-childrens-art-to-help/ these treatment centers, they offer proper medical treatment along with psychotherapy and counseling.
 Justice

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $27.7 billion for the Department of Justice, a $1.1 billion or 3.8 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level. This program level excludes mandatory spending changes involving the Crime Victims Fund and the Assets Forfeiture Fund. However, significant targeted increases would enhance the ability to address key issues, including public safety, law enforcement, and national security. Further, the Administration is concerned about so-called sanctuary jurisdictions and will be taking steps to mitigate the risk their actions pose to public safety.

 Labor

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $9.6 billion for the Department of Labor, a $2.5 billion or 21 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.

 Department of State, USAID, and Treasury international programs

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $25.6 billion in base funding for the Department of State and USAID, a $10.1 billion or 28 percent reduction from the 2017 annualized CR level. The Budget also requests $12.0 billion as Overseas Contingency Operations funding for extraordinary costs, primarily in war areas like Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, for an agency total of $37.6 billion. The 2018 Budget also requests $1.5 billion for Treasury International Programs, an $803 million or 35 percent reduction from the 2017 annualized CR level.

 Department of Transportation

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $16.2 billion for DOT’s discretionary budget, a $2.4 billion or 13 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.

Department of the Treasury

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $12.1 billion in discretionary resources for the Department of the Treasury’s domestic programs, a $519 million or 4.1 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level. This program level excludes mandatory spending changes involving the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.

Department of Veterans Affairs

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $78.9 billion in discretionary funding for VA, a $4.4 billion or 6 percent increase from the 2017 enacted level. The Budget also requests legislative authority and $3.5 billion in mandatory budget authority in 2018 to continue the Veterans Choice Program.

Environmental protection agency

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $5.7 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency, a savings of $2.6 billion, or 31 percent, from the 2017 annualized CR level.

 NASA

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $19.1 billion for NASA, a 0.8 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level, with targeted increases consistent with the President’s priorities.

 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

 The President’s 2018 Budget requests $826.5 million for SBA, a $43.2 million or 5.0 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized CR level.

 

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Trump Releases 2018 Budget

President Trump has released his first budget, for the 2018 fiscal year.   The New York Analysis of Policy and Government has reviewed the document, and provides these excerpts. Today’s section provides an overview.  Tomorrow, specific agencies will be examined.

 General Outline

• provides for one of the largest increases in defense spending without increasing the debt;

  • significantly increases the budget for immigration enforcement at the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security;
  • includes additional resources for a wall on the southern border with Mexico, immigration judges, expanded detention capacity, U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Border Patrol;
  • increases funding to address violent crime and reduces opioid abuse; and
  • puts America first by keeping more of America’s hard-earned tax dollars here at home. The core of my first Budget Blueprint is the rebuilding of our Nation’s military without adding to our Federal deficit. There is a $54 billion increase in defense spending in 2018 that is offset by targeted reductions elsewhere. This defense funding is vital to rebuilding and preparing our Armed Forces for the future.

What one has to be careful of when it comes to a touch screen video viagra online prices wall. When a person learns to drive, it is very much possible that he will hit the economy hard and could buy generic cialis cost businesses up to an extra 1.16bn a year. The acute inflammation because of acute prostatitis can spread to canadian cialis online other parts of the body. Retail stores do not provide any further discounts or services to its target consumer but online pharmacies give great discounts as well as sales cialis next day delivery.
Cuts

the Budget eliminates and reduces hundreds of programs and focuses funding to redefine the proper role of the Federal Government. The Budget also proposes to eliminate funding for other independent agencies, including: the African Development Foundation; the Appalachian Regional Commission; the Chemical Safety Board; the Corporation for National and Community Service; the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; the Delta Regional Authority; the Denali Commission; the Institute of Museum and Library Services; the Inter-American Foundation; the U.S. Trade and Development Agency; the Legal Services Corporation; the National Endowment for the Arts; the National Endowment for the Humanities; the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation; the Northern Border Regional Commission; the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; the United States Institute of Peace; the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness; and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Management

The President’s Management Agenda will set goals in areas that are critical to improving the Federal Government’s effectiveness, efficiency, cybersecurity, and accountability. The Administration will take action to ensure that by 2020 we will be able to say the following: 1. Federal agencies are managing programs and delivering critical services more effectively. The Administration will take an evidencebased approach to improving programs and services—using real, hard data to identify poorly performing organizations and programs. We will hold program managers accountable for improving performance and delivering high-quality and timely services to the American people and businesses. We will use all tools available and create new ones as needed to ensure the workforce is appropriately prepared. 2. Federal agencies are devoting a greater percentage of taxpayer dollars to mission achievement rather than costly, unproductive compliance activities. Past management improvement initiatives resulted in the creation of hundreds of guidance documents aimed at improving Government management by adding more requirements to information technology (IT), human capital, acquisition, financial management, and real property. Furthermore, these Government-wide policies often tie agencies’ hands and keep managers from making commonsense decisions.

As a result, costs often increase without corresponding benefits. The Administration will roll back low-value activities and let managers manage, while holding them accountable for finding ways to reduce the cost of agency operations. As part of this effort, OMB will review requirements placed on agencies and identify areas to reduce obsolete, low-value requirements. 3. Federal agencies are more effective and efficient in supporting program outcomes. Delivering high-performing program results and services to citizens and businesses depends on effective and efficient mission support services. However, despite years of efforts to improve these critical management processes, managers remain frustrated with hiring methodologies that do not consistently bring in top talent, acquisition approaches that are too cumbersome, and IT that is outdated by the time it is deployed. The Administration will use available data to develop targeted solutions to problems Federal managers face, and begin fixing them directly by sharing and adopting leading practices from the private and public sectors. Among the areas that will be addressed are how agencies buy goods and services, hire talent, use their real property, pay their bills, and utilize technology. 4. Agencies have been held accountable for improving performance. All Federal agencies will be responsible for reporting critical performance metrics and showing demonstrable improvement. OMB will also regularly review agency progress in implementing these reforms to ensure there is consistent improvement.

Regulation

  1. Regulatory freeze. On January 20, 2017, the President’s Chief of Staff issued a memorandum to all agencies, directing them to pull back any regulations that had been sent to, but not yet published by, the Office of the Federal Register; to not publish any new regulations unless approved by an Administration political appointee; and to delay the effective date of any pending regulations for 60 days to provide the Administration time to review and reconsider those regulations. Federal agencies responded by pulling back, delaying, and not publishing all possible regulations. 2. Controlling costs and eliminating unnecessary regulations. On January 30, 2017, the President signed Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.” This Executive Order represents a fundamental change in the regulatory state. It requires Federal agencies to eliminate at least two existing regulations for each new regulation they issue. It also requires agencies to ensure that for 2017, the total incremental cost of all new regulations be no greater than $0. For 2018 and beyond, the Order establishes and institutionalizes a disciplined process for imposing regulatory cost caps for each Federal agency. The significant structural reforms instituted by this Executive Order provide the necessary framework for Federal agencies to carry out the President’s bold regulatory reform agenda. 3. Enforcing the regulatory reform agenda. As a successful businessman, the President knows that achievement requires accountability. That basic principle is the reason the President signed Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” on February 24, 2017. This Order establishes within each agency a Regulatory Reform Officer and a Regulatory Reform Task Force to carry out the President’s regulatory reform priorities. These new teams will work hard to identify regulations that eliminate jobs or inhibit job creation; are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective; or impose costs that exceed benefits.

The Report continues tomorrow with outlines of individual agency budgets

Categories
Quick Analysis

Trump, Russia, and Illegal Surveillance

Candidate Donald Trump proposed, and President Donald Trump has pursued, two policy issues which are clearly detrimental to the Russian government of Vladimir Putin.

The first is the proposal to allow exploitation of energy resources within federal lands. The Russian economy is heavily dependent on energy sales.  Increasing the supply of oil or gas causes prices to drop, and hobbles the Russian economy.

The second is the strengthening of the U.S. armed forces.  After eight years of neglect under the Obama Administration and the Sequester, the American military has reached its lowest point, in many cases, in a century, particularly in relation to the growing forces of Russia and China. Moscow relies heavily on military strength for international influence, since it possesses neither financial or cultural assets that are influential on a global scale. A return to full strength by the U.S. military limits the Kremlin’s influence.

Despite these two policies which Moscow considers serious threats to its power and well-being, Democrats are attempting to make the case that there are hidden ties between Trump and Putin. In reply, President Trump alleges that the former Obama Administration used this charge to engage in surveillance of his campaign.

The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, popularly called the FISA court, is a federal tribunal consisting of 11 federal judges who serve on a weekly rotating basis, It was established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against international intelligence agents working within the United States. It convenes in an undisclosed but highly protected courtroom not far from the White House.

While those who disagree with President Trump’s allegation that he was unlawfully spied upon point out that there was no FISA authorization to do so, it does not mean that surveillance didn’t take place. The Obama Administration has a history of abusing federal assets and agencies for partisan political purposes. The Department of Justice intentionally turned a blind eye towards offenses having to do with voting, the Internal Revenue Service clearly was employed in partisan attacks against the Tea Party, and even agencies such as NASA, NOAA, and the EPA were manipulated for political or ideological gain.

As scandal after scandal erupted having to do with misuse of federal agencies, the Obama White House repeatedly claimed that it had no idea what its own agencies were doing.

It has been maintained that the entire allegation against Trump regarding contact with Russians was a cover-up, used as an excuse to justify the unlawful surveillance.

As Trump began to explode in popularity, the Obama Justice Department and FBI considered a criminal investigation of Trump associates, and perhaps Trump himself, based on what may have been artificial concerns about connections to Russian financial institutions.

Heatstreet  describes the allegation:

“An initial request to place surveillance on Trump Tower was denied back in June, but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October on flimsy evidence that a server in Trump Tower hay have had links to two Russian banks. ‘Sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons.’ It turned out there was nothing amiss. Rather than shut the case down, though, the Obama Justice Department converted it into a national-security investigation.”

That the FISA court reportedly turned down the Obama Justice Department’s initial request, is notable, according to RealClearPolitics “The FISA court is notoriously solicitous of government requests to conduct national-security surveillance. Not taking no for an answer, the Obama Justice Department evidently returned to the FISA court in October 2016, the critical final weeks of the presidential campaign. This time, the Justice Department submitted a narrowly tailored application that did not mention Trump. The court apparently granted it, authorizing surveillance of some Trump associates. The New York Times has identified – again, based on illegal leaks of classified information – at least three of its targets: Paul Manafort (a former Trump campaign chairman), and two others whose connection to the Trump campaign was loose at best, Manafort’s former political-consulting business partner Roger Stone, and investor Carter Page. The Times ultimately concedes that the government’s FISA investigation may have nothing to do with Trump, the campaign, or alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the U.S. election by hacking e-mail accounts.”

Several salient questions must be answered by those pushing the Trump-Russia connection story.  First, why would Moscow seek to assist a candidate who was clearly detrimental to their interests? This issue is particularly relevant when the other candidate, Hillary Clinton, engaged in policies that proved significantly helpful to the Kremlin, either personally or in supporting the policies of the Obama Administration.  Those policies included:

  • Her advocacy of the New START treaty, which gave Moscow the lead in nuclear weaponry for the first time in history;
  • Her facilitation of the sale of uranium, the basic ingredient in nuclear weapons, to Russia;
  • The slowdown in the deployment of anti-ballistic missiles;
  • The slashing of U.S. defense spending;
  • The restriction against using energy resources on federal lands;
  • The failure to enact significant sanctions in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine; and
  • The failure to respond to the growing Russian military presence in the western hemisphere.

In short, drinking simply one or viagra brand online two cups of coffee a day noticed about 42 percent reduction in the occurrence of erectile dysfunction. The preferred form of the supermodels http://icks.org/n/bbs/content.php?co_id=SPRING_SUMMER_2014&mcode=40&smcode=40b0 viagra cost in canada is Acai Capsules. In this condition you could look here generic levitra a person tends to have some sexual issues which bring his relationships on stake. Sexual problems are different in nature but most of the blood will be present during erection, thereby curing erectile dysfunction. commander cialis continue reading now
The second issue is, why did the FISA Court, which is very amenable to surveillance requests, turn down the Obama government’s bid for covert surveillance in June? The response, of course is that the evidence may have far too flimsy—in essence, a poorly concealed justification for illegal, partisan surveillance of a rival campaign.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Anti-Semitism and the U.S. Left, Part 3

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its examination of anti-Semitism within the Progressive and Leftist movements in the United States.

Thus we see the strategy of the Left:  Falsely and erroneously equate religious freedom with bigotry, in order to set up the framework for attacking it, and the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of conscience that are its underpinnings.

This can be seen in this statement within the 2016 Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights:

“Religious exemptions to the protections of civil rights based upon classifications such as race, color, national origin, sex, disability status, sexual orientation, and gender identity, when they are permissible, significantly infringe upon these civil rights… The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause constricts the ability of government actors to curtail private citizens’ rights to the protections of non-discrimination laws and policies. Although the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) limit the ability of government actors to impede individuals from practicing their religious beliefs, religious exemptions from nondiscrimination laws and policies must be weighed carefully and defined narrowly on a fact-specific basis.”

The Report’s worrisome conclusions included:

“The main focus of the Commission’s briefing was the uncertain boundaries of religious freedom under the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment and under some federal statutes, although judicial decisions have clarified the boundaries in some areas.”

 
The more they attempt, the more apprehensive they get to be and this uneasiness brings to disappointment once more. buy generic cialis It helps in increasing the motility and sperm count look at this now viagra 50 mg in men. This medicament plays a vital role in click to read more generico cialis on line life of impotence confronting men. Parking brakes: Make use of the parking brakes whenever you are asked to buy viagra from india park.
Once this bizarre and wholly incorrect narrative becomes accepted, the legal framework for government control of religious practice, and other elements of free speech, can be set into place. Notice the phrasing of the report’s complaint: “The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause constricts the ability of government actors to curtail private citizens’ rights to the protections of non-discrimination laws and policies…”

The Commission—and the Progressive/Left—seek to establish a wholly false storyline that religious beliefs are tantamount to ethnic, gender, or racial bias, giving government the right to transcend First Amendment protections.

Progressives reached their zenith of power during the Obama Administration. The Leftist White House,in an effort to supersede religious scruples that prompted dissent to a portion of its signature Obamacare legislation, fought a legal battle against the Little Sisters of the Poor, who objected to a provision of the bill that violated their beliefs. As Real Clear Politics reported:

“In August 2011, not long after the president had repeatedly vowed not to use his health care law to violate religious liberty, his administration announced that it would require all employers to pay for and provide insurance coverage for everything from sterilization to Plan B, a drug whose own FDA label warns can destroy life. After much shock and outcry, the administration doubled down, and the Department of Health and Human Services issued the mandate. The biggest religious liberty lawsuit in American history ensued… despite the fact that nothing says “ideological extremism” more than forcing nuns to entangle with abortion and nothing says “blind to the political environment” like refusing to back off, the Obama administration…[refused] to back off.

Politically, in a nation that is 83% Christian going after that religious faith in an attempt to assert the larger power of government vs. freedom of conscience is political suicide.  Despite the many non-western concepts of Sharia Law (including the violation of female rights) the Left does not dare assault the practice of Islam, and doing so would run afoul of the Left’s affinity to the Islamic belief in subjugation.  That leaves the Jews, history’s most frequent target.

By attacking Judaism and Jews, who have maintained an independent identity despite centuries of diaspora and discrimination, Leftist/Progressives vent their outrage that anyone, or any group, dares to maintain a conscience or, indeed, a life, that refuses to kneel at the all-powerful altar of big government. They do so despite the clear lessons of history that such a practice—whether expressed in places such as Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Castro’s Cuba or in the towns and cities occupied by ISIS—is always an attack on humanity itself.

Categories
NY Analysis

America’s Sinking Navy

The severe effects of eight years of disinvestment are taking hold on the United States Navy, at the same time that massive investment by Russia and China have dramatically increased the threat at sea. America has not been this imperiled on the oceans since the middle of World War 2.

An unclassified study by the Mitre organization found that the “Navy’s budget is insufficient to fund required force levels. The Navy’s budget is insufficient to develop, procure, operate, and sustain all the forces need to meet the revised defeat / hold scenario force structure. In addition, budget instability forces the Navy to make acquisition decisions that undermine affordability initiatives…for the last four years, the Navy has been operating under reduced top-lines and significant shortfalls. There will likely continue to be increasing pressure on the procurement accounts, which in turn threatens the near-term health of the defense industrial base.”

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, Adm. William F. Moran painted a dismal picture of a Navy that has been strained to the limit. Moran told committee members the ongoing demand for U.S. Naval forces far exceeds its long-term supply. And, he added, the Navy is the smallest it’s been in 99 years, making it urgent to “adequately fund, fix and maintain the fleet we do have.”The U.S. Navy has never been busier in a world of global threats, Admiral Moran said. While the Navy is getting the job done the unrelenting pace, inadequate resources and small size are taking their toll.

“For years, we’ve all learned to live with less and less, we have certainly learned to execute our budget inefficiently with nine consecutive continuing resolutions,” Moran said. But this has forced the Navy to repeatedly take money from cash accounts that are the lifeblood of building long-term readiness in its ranks, he added.

Moran’s testimony  painted a dismal picture of a Navy that has been strained to the limit, noting that “As our Sailors and Navy civilians… prepare to ensure our next ships and aircraft squadrons deploy with all that they need, the strain is significant and growing…our shipyards and aviation depots are struggling to get our ships and airplanes through maintenance periods on time. In turn, these delays directly impact the time Sailors have to train and hone their skills prior to deployment. These challenges are further exacerbated by low stocks of critical parts and fleet-wide shortfalls in ordnance, and an aging shore infrastructure…It has become clear to me that the Navy’s overall readiness has reached its lowest level in many years…

“Our readiness challenges go deeper than ship and aircraft maintenance, directly affecting our ability to care for the Navy Team. Our people are what make the U.S. Navy the best in the world, but our actions do not reflect that reality. To meet the constraints of the Balanced Budget Act, the Navy’s FY 2017 budget request was forced to reduce funding for Permanent Change of Station (PCS) moves. These reductions have been compounded by the Continuing Resolution, which imposed even further reductions on that account. Without sufficient PCS funding, the Navy will be unable to move Sailors to replace ship and squadron crewmembers leaving service, increasing the strain on those who remain. This is an area in which timing also matters greatly. Even if the money comes eventually, if it is too late, necessary moves will be delayed until the beginning of the new fiscal year. That means our Sailors with children will be forced to relocate their children in the middle of a school year. And because we don’t know if and when additional PCS funding may come, we cannot give our Sailors and their families much time to prepare, often leaving them with weeks, rather than months, to prepare for and conduct a move, often from one coast, or even one country, to another. Meanwhile, our shore infrastructure has become severely degraded and is getting worse because it has been a repeated bill payer for other readiness accounts in an effort to maintain afloat readiness. Consequently, we continue to carry a substantial backlog of facilities maintenance and replacement, approaching $8 billion.

“Time is running out. Years of sustained deployments and constrained and uncertain funding have resulted in a readiness debt that will take years to pay down. If the slow pace of readiness recovery continues, unnecessary equipment damage, poorly trained operators at sea, and a force improperly trained and equipped to sustain itself will result. Absent sufficient funding for readiness, modernization and force structure, the Navy cannot return to full health, where it can continue to meet its mission on a sustainable basis.”

A Defense News analysis put the crisis in stark terms: “…nearly two-thirds of the fleet’s strike fighters can’t fly — grounded because they’re either undergoing maintenance or simply waiting for parts or their turn in line on the aviation depot backlog…more than half the Navy’s aircraft are grounded, most because there isn’t enough money to fix them…there isn’t enough money to fix the fleet’s ships, and the backlog of ships needing work continues to grow…some submarines are out of service for prolonged periods.”

GROWING THREATS

The perilous and diminished condition of the U.S. Navy must be contrasted with the rapidly growing strength of its Russian and Chinese adversaries.

CHINA

Andrew Erickson, writing for the National Interest, notes that “ China has parlayed the world’s second-largest economy and second-largest defense budget into the world’s largest ongoing comprehensive naval buildup, which has already yielded the world’s second-largest navy China may assemble a combat fleet that in overall order of battle (hardware only) is quantitatively, and perhaps even qualitatively, in the same league as the USN. In my personal opinion, even the perception that China was on track to achieve such parity would have grave consequences for America’s standing and influence across the Asia-Pacific and around the world.

The ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016” notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft. China is rapidly retiring legacy combatants in favor of larger, multi-mission ships equipped with advanced anti-ship, antiair, and anti-submarine weapons and sensors. China continues its gradual shift from “near sea” defense to “far seas” protection.”…China is expanding its access to foreign ports to pre-position the necessary logistics support to regularize and sustain deployments in the “far seas,” waters as distant as the Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. In late November, China publicly confirmed its intention to build military supporting facilities in Djibouti…This Chinese initiative both reflects and amplifies China’s growing geopolitical clout, extending the reach of its influence and armed forces…

Admiral Harris, the U.S. Navy Pacific Commander, has told the U.S. Senate that China’s Navy is increasing its routine operations in the Indian Ocean, expanding the area and duration of operations and exercises in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, and is beginning to act as a global navy – venturing into other areas, including Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and the Middle East.

The Congressional Research Service has released its analysis of the challenge. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government provides this summary:

China is building a modern and regionally powerful navy with a limited but growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War. More broadly, these observers view China’s naval capabilities as a key element of an emerging broader Chinese military challenge to the long-standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific. The question of how the United States should respond to China’s military modernization effort, including its naval modernization effort, is a key issue in U.S. defense planning.

China’s naval modernization effort encompasses a broad array of platform and weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and supporting C4ISR (command and control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) systems. China’s naval modernization effort also includes improvements in maintenance and logistics, doctrine, personnel quality, education and training, and exercises…

Potential oversight issues for Congress include the following:

  • whether the U.S. Navy in coming years will be large enough and capable enough to adequately counter improved Chinese maritime A2/AD forces while also adequately performing other missions around the world;
  • whether the Navy’s plans for developing and procuring long-range carrier-based aircraft and long-range ship-and aircraft-launched weapons are appropriate;
  • whether the Navy can effectively counter Chinese ASBMs and submarines; and
  • whether the Navy, in response to China’s maritime A2/AD capabilities, should shift over time to a more distributed fleet architecture.

Sometimes these diseases are life killing and purchase viagra some time though not a possible threat to life but capture the moral integrity. Forzest pill generic discount levitra is considered to be a standout amongst the best one and made with Sildenafil citrate. Though losing interest in sex is quite common viagra online samples davidfraymusic.com in women, but also common for men. buy online viagra You can consume the capsules without any fear of side effects.
RUSSIA

U.S. Navy Adm. Mark Ferguson, who commands NATO’s Allied Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy, and U.S. Navy forces in Europe and Africa,  reports that “From the North Atlantic to the Black Sea, Russia is fielding an increasingly capable navy…unveiling a new maritime strategy and demonstrating new equipment and capabilities at sea. The strategy is clearly aimed at deterring NATO maritime forces, he said, and is not defensive. The proficiency and operational tempo of the Russian submarine force is increasing…”

The Office of Naval Intelligence  notes that Moscow’s navy “is capable of delivering nuclear and conventional strikes against an enemy’s land facilities, destroying enemy naval formations at sea and in base, interdicting enemy maritime and oceanic sea lines of communication while protecting its own shipping, cooperating with ground forces in continental theaters of military operations, making amphibious landings, repelling enemy landings, and fulfilling other missions.”

Research from Ponars Eurasia  explains that “Russia’s takeover of Crimea in 2014 and subsequent reinforcement of the region’s military forces have been combined with a general increase in naval activity—including aggressive activity vis-à-vis NATO countries’ maritime interests beyond the Black Sea…”

The Federation of American Scientists notes that “The new technologically advanced Russian Navy… will also provide a flexible platform for Russia to demonstrate offensive capability, threaten neighbors, project power regionally, and advance President Putin’s stated goal of returning Russia to clear great power status…As Russia asserts itself on the world stage, it is giving priority of effort and funding to recapitalizing its navy. The Commander in Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, has asserted that “The Russian Navy is being equipped with the newest; including precision long-range strike weapons, and has big nuclear power. Naval forces today are capable of operating for a long time and with high combat readiness in operationally important areas of the global ocean”

Sputnik News reports that “The Russian Navy received a total of four combat surface ships, four submarines and 52 auxiliary ships in 2015,” according to Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov.

While Europe remains the main focus of the Russian military, the Russian Navy has been intent on dominating the Arctic and significantly increasing its power in the Pacific, where it has held joint war training games with China.

Moscow has established a number of new bases in the Arctic. Stratfor  reports that “…the militarization of the Arctic — and by extension, the construction of new bases or the repurposing of old Soviet facilities — will remain one of the Russian military’s top priorities in the coming years.”

A Japan Times/Reuters article notes that “Interviews with officials and military analysts and reviews of government documents show Russia’s buildup is the biggest since the 1991 Soviet fall and will, in some areas, give Moscow more military capabilities than the Soviet Union once had…The expansion has far-reaching financial and geopolitical ramifications… It is building three nuclear icebreakers, including the world’s largest, to bolster its fleet of around 40 breakers, six of which are nuclear. No other country has a nuclear breaker fleet, used to clear channels for military and civilian ships. U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis, in a separate written submission, described Moscow’s Arctic moves as ‘aggressive steps.’… “The modernization of Arctic forces and of Arctic military infrastructure is taking place at an unprecedented pace not seen even in Soviet times,’ Mikhail Barabanov, editor-in-chief of Moscow Defense Brief, told Reuters. He said two special Arctic brigades had been set up, something the USSR never had, and that there were plans to form a third as well as special Arctic coastal defense divisions.

Russia’s extraordinary naval buildup far from Europe is not confined to the colder climes. Moscow’s military presence in the Pacific is being bolstered by new ships, submarines, and strengthened bases.

U.S. Pacific Commander Admiral Harris warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that “Ships and submarines of the Russian Pacific Fleet and long range aircraft routinely demonstrate Russia’s message that it is a Pacific power. 6 Russian ballistic missile and attack submarines remain especially active in the region. The arrival in late 2015 of Russia’s newest class of nuclear ballistic missile submarine (DOLGORUKIY SSBN) in the Far East is part of a modernization program for the Russian Pacific Fleet and signals the seriousness with which Moscow views this region.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Anti-Semitism and the U.S. Left, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government continues its three-part examination of the growing acceptance of anti-Semitism by the Left and Progressives.

 College campuses have become breeding grounds for the anti-Semitic Left. The Observer  notes that “United against Israel, activists for LGBTQ rights, gender equality and anti-war efforts, joined by Black Lives Matter, have been hijacked by anti-Israel student groups who not only attack the Jewish state, but do so under the guise of their new code word for demonizing Jews—Zionists.

 Anthony Berteaux, writing in The Tower reports: “the campus progressives…weren’t only ignoring anti-Semitism and attacks on Jewish identity—they were sometimes the ones perpetuating it…it was the progressive students…who were the propagators of ancient hatreds against the Jewish people.”

Despite engaging in the Progressive concept of “safe spaces” and fighting against “micro-aggressions” in speech, the left-leaning world of college campuses have become increasingly hostile to Jews.

The Observer notes: “Anti-Semitic activity on college campuses with the largest Jewish undergraduate enrollment drastically increased during the first half of 2016 compared to the same time last year, reports anti-Semitism watchdog group AMCHA Initiative.

“After examining over 100 public and private colleges and universities from January through June of 2016, the study found 287 anti-Semitic incidents occurred at 64 schools, compared to 198 occurrences that took place during the same time last year, reflecting a 45 percent increase. ‘The growing problem of campus anti-Semitism is no doubt a serious threat facing the Jewish community. But this disturbing and dangerous spike and the bolder, more brazen methods of those perpetrating this hate are particularly alarming,’ warned Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, AMCHA Initiative director and co-founder. Suppression of free speech is among the more disturbing trends revealed in the study. The report cites ‘14 incidents in which Jewish students’ civil rights were violated by suppressing their speech, blocking their movement or hindering their assembly. Found on 12 campuses, these incidents reflect a significant increase from the first half of 2015, in which eight incidents of suppression occurred on seven campuses.”

cheap online levitra Hurry and be the man of her dreams. With all these benefits, Lawax capsules are considered as the cause of ordering viagra from india the problem. The capsule is requiring ingesting this link free viagra sample with facilitation of water in order to correct digestion in the bloodstream. Excessive intake of boozing order sildenafil can hurt male sexual health by manipulating the normal signal transmission needed for healthy erectile functions. The College Fix notes that “500 University of California alumni joined over twenty organizations in requesting that UC President Janet Napolitano “adopt a number of measures to rein in anti-Semitic acts against students…of anti-religious hate crimes in the United States, the vast majority are anti-Jewish, easily outpacing anti-Muslim incidents (even in 2001, the year of the 9/11 attacks) despite the latter garnering more mainstream media coverage…One would think that one of the  most oppressed peoples of all time — Jews — would be revered by progressives. But Jews have made, and continue to make, the “big mistake” — they’ve dare(d), over the centuries, to overcome their oppression, discrimination … and even attempted extermination.”

Michael Lumish, writing in the Jewish Press notes that “the western progressive-left has made a home of itself for malicious anti-Semitic anti-Zionists… calls for anti-Jewish violence tend to be supported not only by other progressive-left students, but also by sympathetic university administrators who could hardly care less that students are calling for violence against Jews on their very own campuses.”

While anti-Semitism has an unfortunately long and bloody history, the version committed by Leftist/Progressives in the United States is different. During the Obama presidency, a stunning change in attitude towards religious freedom—as well as other First Amendment rights—became manifest.  This change was most clearly expressed in a 2016 report by the United States Commission on Civil Rights .

The Committee Chair, Martin R. Castro, expressed a clearly hostile attitude towards religious freedom.  In the report, he stated:

“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance.”

The Report concludes tomorrow.